- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486 CRL.A No. 100254 of 2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 100254 OF 2017 (C) BETWEEN: RANGANATH VADDAPPA GHANTI, AGE: 30 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE, R/O: MUDAKAVI VILLAGE, TQ: RAMDURG, DIST: BELAGAVI. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. K.L. PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND: STATE OF KARNATAKA, BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH, AT DHARWAD, THROUGH RAMDURG POLICE STATION. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. JAIRAM SIDDI, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 374(2) OF CR.P.C., PRAYING TO SECURE THE RECORDS AND TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND INTURN SETTING ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND ORDER SENTENCE DATED 13.07.2017 PASSED IN SESSIONS CASE NO. 147 OF 2016 BY III ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND SPECIAL COURT UNDER POCSO ACT, 2012, BELAGAVI AND TO ACQUIT THE APPELLANT / ACCUSED FROM THE ALLEGED OFFENCES UNDER SECTION 376 READ WITH 511 OF IPC AND SEC. 4 AND 6 OF READ WITH 18 OF POCSO ACT. THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: Digitally signed by CHANDRASHEKAR LAXMAN KATTIMANI Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench. - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486 CRL.A No. 100254 of 2017 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA) Heard Sri K.L.Patil, learned counsel for appellant and Sri Jairam Siddi, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent. 2. Appellant is the accused in S.C.No.147/2016 who suffered an order of conviction for offence punishable under Section 323, 307, 376 IPC and Section 4 and 6 read with Section 18 of the of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 (‘POCSO Act’, for short) and sentenced as under: “The accused is sentenced to under go rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay the fine of Rs.6,000/- for the offence punishable under Sec. 376 R/W Sec.511 of IPC. In default to pay the fine amount, accused shall under go simple imprisonment for two months. The accused is sentenced to under go simple imprisonment for 35 years and to pay the fine of Rs.2,500/- for the offence punishable under Sec.4 R/w Sec.18 of POCSO Act. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486 CRL.A No. 100254 of 2017 In default to pay the fine amount, accused shall under go simple imprisonment for one months. The accused is sentenced to under go rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay the fine of Rs.6,000/- for the offence punishable under Sec.6 R/w Sec.18 of POCSO Act. In default to pay the fine amount, accused shall under go simple imprisonment for two months. The substantial sentence of imprisonment shall run concurrently. The accused is entitled for the benefit of set off as provided under Sec. 428 of Cr.P.C. for the period for which, he was in judicial custody in respect of this case. Out of the fine amount, if paid, a sum of Rs.10,000/- is ordered to be paid to Victim girl, through her minor guardian father, Sri Vijaya Laxmana Yaragannavara, as compensation. Since the above compensation awarded to the victim girl is inadequate and she may get the same, only when fine was paid by the accused, acting under Sec. 457(A) of Cr.P.C., victim girl is directed to approach the District Legal Services Authority, Belagavi to get the additional compensation under the victim compensation scheme. Office to furnish the copy of this judgment to the accused free of cost, forth with.” - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486 CRL.A No. 100254 of 2017 3. Facts of the case in nutshell which are utmost necessary for disposal of the present appeal are as under: 3.1 Upon the complaint lodged by Vijay Laxman Yaragannavar (PW1), Ramdurg Police registered a case in Crime No.52/2016 on 16.02.2016 for the offences under Section 376 IPC and Section 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. 3.2 Gist of the complaint averments would reveal that accused had forcible sexual intercourse with the daughter of the complainant aged 4 ½ years on 15.02.2016 by gagging her mouth. 3.3 Police after registering the case thoroughly investigated the matter and filed charge sheet. Presence of the accused was secured and charges were framed. Accused pleaded not guilty. Therefore, trial was held. 3.4 In order to prove the case of the prosecution, in all, twelve witnesses were examined comprising of complaint, punch witnesses, doctor examined the accused as well as the victim girl and the Investigation Officers and nineteen documentary - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486 CRL.A No. 100254 of 2017 evidence were placed on record which were exhibited and marked as Exs.P1 to P19 besides marking nine material objects. 4. On conclusion of recording of evidence, learned trial Judge recorded the accused's statement wherein accused has denied all the incriminatory materials and thereafter heard the arguments of the parties and convicted the accused and sentenced as referred to supra. 5. Being aggrieved by the same, appellant is before this Court in this appeal on following grounds.  That, the Accused/Appellant is innocent person and hasnot committed any of the offences as alleged and is entitled to be acquitted from the charges leveled against him, by setting aside judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed against him by the trial Court.  On perusal of entire evidence on record it will discloses that, there is no believable evidence against the Appellant for the proof of the charges leveled against them.  The reasoning assigned by the trial Court in concluding that, the Prosecution has proved beyond all reasonable grounds, that, the Accused/Appellant has committed the offences and are found guilty for - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486 CRL.A No. 100254 of 2017 the offences punishable U/ss. 376 R/w. 511 of IPC and U/sec. 4 and 6 R/w. 18 of POCSO Act, are not legally acceptable one and judgment of conviction is required to be set aside.  That, on perusal of the contents of the judgment, it discloses that, the trial Court erred mainly relying on the evidence of Prosecution, came to the conclusion that, the accused person has committed the alleged offence.  That, on perusal of the document Ex-P13 it clearly discloses that, there are no external injuries on the body of the victim girl. This fact makes it clear that, there is no possibility of committal of the alleged offence by the Appellant.  On perusal of the document Ex-P13, it makes it clear that, all the external genitalia are normal as per the parameters. Hence this fact makes it clear that, the question of committing the alleged offence is doubtful in nature.  That, it is pertinent to note that, the medical reports are not supported the case of the Prosecution in order to prove the alleged offence U/sec. 376 of IPC and offences under the provisions of the POCSO Act.  That, except the complainant, there is no corroborative evidence to show that the Appellant has committed the alleged offences. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486 CRL.A No. 100254 of 2017  On perusal of the entire evidence on record it nowhere discloses the specific overt act of the Appellant in order to convict for the alleged offences.  That, it is pertinent to note that, specific allegations against the Appellant are not forthcoming in the FIR as well as the complaint. This fact makes it clear that, the Appellant is not present at the time of the alleged incident and is nowhere concerned to the alleged incident.  The other witnesses have not supported the case of the Prosecution. Hence, proving of the allegations and charges against the Appellant by prosecution beyond reasonable doubt is legally not acceptable one and cannot be taken into consideration.  That, on perusal of the entire evidence on record including the contents of the charge sheet it nowhere discloses the specific overtact of the Appellant in the alleged incident.  That, on perusal of the documents on record as well as the charge sheet, it nowhere discloses the name of the present Appellant even in the allegations and also in the statement recorded by the investigation officer.  On perusal of the evidence on record it nowhere discloses the name of the Appellant in any evidence - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486 CRL.A No. 100254 of 2017 or depositions deposed by the Prosecution witnesses and also his specific overtact.  It is pertinent to note that, in the absence of the specific identification of the Appellant in the alleged incident and also the specific overtact, conviction of the Appellant is legally not sustainable and is liable to be set aside.  The evidence on record if taken together it gives the clear picture that there are number of contradictions and they are not corroborative to each other and even the evidence of informant does not corroborate the contents of Ex-P1 Complaint.  On perusal of the evidence on record it gives the picture that, there is no clarity in the investigation as required and with an intention to bring an end to the investigation the name of the Accused person is included in this case on unbelievable allegations and facts.  The reasoning's assigned by the trial Court in coming to the conclusion is not legally acceptable one so as to convict the Accused person.  The trial Court erred in believing the evidence of Prosecution and in passing judgment of conviction and the sentence awarded is also appears to be harsh one. - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486 CRL.A No. 100254 of 2017  The evidence of the Prosecution is not beyond reasonable doubt so as to convict the Accused person. 6. Sri K.L.Patil, learned counsel for the appellant reiterating the grounds urged in the appeal memorandum vehemently contended that the testimony of PW1-complainant and the victim girl are not sufficient to bring home the guilt of the accused inasmuch as victim was aged 6 years at the time of recording the evidence and at the time of incident, she was aged about 4 ½ years. 7. He further contended that the oral testimony of PW10 (victim girl) is artificial as victim at that age is not in a position to specifically depose about the male part being introduced into female part and it looks that it is a tutored testimony and therefore, sought for allowing the appeal. 8. He would also contend that in the absence of requirement of the substantial evidence of male part being introduced into the female part to any extent, offence under Section 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act cannot be attracted and - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486 CRL.A No. 100254 of 2017 convicting the appellant with the aid of Section 18 of POCSO Act is impermissible. 9. He would further argue that the medical report of the victim girl do not corroborate with the oral testimony would not be sufficient to maintain the conviction of the accused and sought for allowing the appeal. 10. Per contra, Sri Jairam Siddi, learned High Court Government Pleader would contend that the RFSL report was received by the doctor and thereafter final opinion has been obtained which would make it clear that there were seminal stains and blood detected in the samples which would conclusively establish the ingredient to attract the offence punishable under Section 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act and sought for dismissal of the appeal. 11. Having heard the arguments of both sides, this Court perused the material on record meticulously. - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486 CRL.A No. 100254 of 2017 12. On such perusal of the material on record, in the light of the arguments put forth on behalf of the parties, following points would arise for consideration. i. Whether the prosecution has established all ingredients to attract the offences punishable under Section 376 IPC and Section 4 and 6 read with Section 18 of the POCSO Act? ii. Whether the impugned judgment is suffering from legal infirmity or perversity and thus calls for interference? iii. Whether the sentence is excessive? iv. What order? Regarding Points (i) and (ii):- 13. In the case on hand, acquaintance of the accused with the complainant and the victim girl is established as victim girl herself has specifically stated the name of the accused while complaining the incident to PW1. Further, as on the date of incident, victim girl was aged about 4 ½ years and at the time of deposing before the Court, she was aged 6 years. - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486 CRL.A No. 100254 of 2017 14. On perusal of the complaint averments and the statement recorded by the jurisdictional Magistrate under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Cr.P.C.’) of the victim girl, make it clear that she was worldly wise and was in a position to answer the questions put by the trial Magistrate logically. Further, merely mentioning the name of the male part and the female part in the examination-in-chief itself cannot be treated as tutoring of the victim girl (PW10). 15. She has specifically deposed before the Court about the incident and accused entering the house, removing the clothes worn by the victim girl and snatching away the plate where she was consuming the lunch and also pressing the neck. She also deposed about intimating the incident to her father and later on taken to the hospital. 16. In her cross-examination, she has answered that she would return from the school at about 02:00 p.m. and usually lunch would be served in the school. She admits that she consumes her lunch every day in the school and used to take dinner in the house. She has also answered that she was living in - 13 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486 CRL.A No. 100254 of 2017 the house along with her elder sister and younger brother. She further answered that she used to be present near the place of construction of the house soonafter the school. Complainant is PW1, who is the father of the victim girl. She has been intimated about the incident by the victim girl herself and a case came to be filed. 17. Medical examination of the victim girl would reveal that results which would corroborate with the testimony of the victim girl and the complainant. 18. RFSL report specifically mentions the presence of seminal and blood stains in the sample. DNA profiling has also been conducted in the samples which tallies with the samples collected by the investigation agency from the body of the accused. 19. In the absence of any strong motive as to falsely implicate the accused in the incident, material evidence placed on record has been rightly appreciated by the learned trial Judge while recording the order of conviction for the aforesaid offences. - 14 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486 CRL.A No. 100254 of 2017 20. In a matter of this nature, usually the oral testimony of the victim would prevail over other circumstances. However, taking note of the fact that the victim was aged 4 ½ years at the time of incident and 6 years at the time of deposing before the Court, as a rule of caution, corroboration is looked for by the trial Judge and by this Court in the light of the arguments put forth on behalf of the appellant. 21. On exercising such caution while re-appreciating the material evidence on record, this Court noted that corroboration for the oral testimony of the victim girl is not only through the oral testimony of PW1, but also through the attendant circumstances including the place of incident and the medical evidence. Medical examination report of the victim girl marked at Exhibit P13 is provisional in nature, as samples were collected from the body of the victim girl, including the vaginal swab, and same was sent to RFSL for examination and report. The RFSL report is found at Exhibit P19. On perusal of the RFSL report, the final opinion is forwarded by the Doctor vide Exhibit P14. 22. On perusal of Exhibit P14, Doctor who examined the victim girl, it is crystal clear that seminal stains were detected in - 15 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486 CRL.A No. 100254 of 2017 the cloth, which is cloth namely ‘langa’ (Skirt), and under garment of the victim girl and knicker of the accused. Blood stains were detected on the langa, blouse and underwear of the victim girl and DNA particle of seminal stains detected in langa, blouse and knicker. The DNA report also tallied with the sample collected from the accused, and the medical report that was filed earlier vide Exhibit P13 mentions no injury on the other parts of the body. Hymen was also found to be intact and there were no external injuries on the labia majora and labia minora. 23. No vaginal discharge is noticed from the victim girl. Therefore, the learned trial Judge has rightly convicted the accused under Section 4 read with Section 18 of the POCSO Act, in other words, it was an attempted a penetrative sexual assault. 24. Thus, on totality of the circumstances, if the prosecution evidence is re-appreciated having regard to the presence of the seminal stains and blood stain on the clothes worn by the victim girl, namely langa, under garments and the blouse, what can be inferred is that there was ejaculation by the accused, but it was not into vagina. - 16 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486 CRL.A No. 100254 of 2017 25. Taking note of the fact that there are no external injuries and hymen being intact, at the most, accused tried to penetrate into the female part of the victim girl, but failed in doing so and ejaculated on the clothes worn by the victim. Therefore, learned trial Judge recording a finding that it is a failed attempt of the accused to have a penetrative sexual assault is founded on the logical and good reasons, which requires no interference even after the re-appreciation of the material evidence. Accordingly, in the view of the foregoing discussion, point No.(i) is answered in the affirmative and point No.(ii) negative. Regarding point No.(iii): 26. In the case on hand, the accused was aged 28 years and working as a coolie. He utilised the loneliness of the victim girl and tried to mis-utilise her, who was aged only 4 ½ years at the time of incident. The greed and lust of the accused is apparent in the case on hand and in that regard, he did not have the minimum courtesy, at least considering the age of the victim girl, and attempted to have a penetrative sexual assault with the - 17 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486 CRL.A No. 100254 of 2017 victim girl, which establishes the manifestation of the animus in him resulting in brutality. 27. Sri.Jairam Siddi, learned High Court Government Pleader, however, contended that the sentence is on the lower side and sought for enhancement. 28. In an appeal filed by the accused, there is no scope for enhancement of the sentence. This Court, in the case of Gousmodin S/o Abdulrehaman Mulla v. State of Karnataka1, noting the settled principles of law on the point, held that such recourse is impermissible. 29. The same was the view of the Hon'ble Apex Court in a subsequent case, in the case of Sachin v. State of Maharashtra2. Therefore, in the absence of any appeal by the State seeking enhancement of the sentence, this Court cannot order for enhanced punishment though the accused has committed brutal act. 1 Criminal Revision Petition No.100216/2019 dated 21.04.2025 2 (2025) 9 SCC 507 - 18 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486 CRL.A No. 100254 of 2017 30. Taking note of the maximum punishment of a minimum of 10 years for the offence under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and having convicted the accused for the offence punishable under Section 6 in aid of Section 18 of the Act, especially in view of the findings in the RFSL report, this Court is of the considered opinion that the sentence of 5 years ordered for offence under Section 6 read with Section 18 of the POCSO Act is just and proper and does not require any interference, having regard to the fact that no mitigating circumstances are placed on record, nor any defence evidence is placed on record. Thus, point No.(iii) is answered in the negative. 31. In view of the finding of this Court on point No.(i) to (iii) as above, regarding point No.(iv) the, following order: ORDER (i) The appeal is meritless and is hereby dismissed. (ii) The appellant, who is having benefit of suspension of sentence, shall surrender before the trial Court on or before - 19 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:1486 CRL.A No. 100254 of 2017 28.02.2026 to serve the remaining part of the sentence. (iii) The office is directed to return the trial Court records with a copy of this Judgment. Sd/- (V.SRISHANANDA) JUDGE CLK,RHR/-, CT:CMU LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 33